No backing down on bisphenol A

A 12-member NIH panel is linkurl:disagreeing;http://www.cspinet.org/integrity/watch/200708131.html#4 with a scientific consensus statement published this month about the health hazards of linkurl:bisphenol;http://www.the-scientist.com/article/display/15654/ A, a common component of plastics. In the statement, in Reproductive Toxicology, 38 scientists warn that the product may cause serious human reproductive disorders. As linkurl:we reported;http://www.the-scientist.

By | August 13, 2007

A 12-member NIH panel is linkurl:disagreeing;http://www.cspinet.org/integrity/watch/200708131.html#4 with a scientific consensus statement published this month about the health hazards of linkurl:bisphenol;http://www.the-scientist.com/article/display/15654/ A, a common component of plastics. In the statement, in Reproductive Toxicology, 38 scientists warn that the product may cause serious human reproductive disorders. As linkurl:we reported;http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/52888/ in February, researchers led by linkurl:Randy Jirtle;http://www.geneimprint.com/lab/ at Duke University exposed mouse mothers-to-be to bisphenol A, which has been banned from baby products in the UK. The research, linkurl:published;http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/abstract/104/32/13056?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=jirtle&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&resourcetype=HWCIT in August 1 by PNAS, showed BPA exposure in the womb affects phenotype by altering the epigenome. (Interestingly, the group found the effects could be counteracted if the pregnant mother ate genistein, a phytoestrogen found in soy.) However, the NIH panel, set up by the National Institute of Health's Center for the Evaluation of Risks to Human Reproduction, disagrees with the scientists' conclusions, and has concluded the health effects were "negligible. " The Los Angeles Times linkurl:found;http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-plastic9aug09,1,6709168.story?coll=la-headlines-nation that the original NIH report on BPA was written by a consulting group with ties to companies that make BPA. This group was fired, but USA Today linkurl:says;http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2007-08-06-bisphenol-A_N.htm independent scientists are saying the revised draft contains too many industry-funded studies.

Comments

Avatar of: kenny shen

kenny shen

Posts: 1

August 13, 2007

I have been following up on the topic and from what I've gathered, NIH's findings leave too much room for being an authority on the topic. Besides, whether they phrase it as some concern or minimal concern, 100% safe is NO concern at all. I'll rather stick to the findings from elsewhere that have been consistent with showing that BPA has considerable effects on humans and babies.

Popular Now

  1. Top 10 Innovations 2016
    Features Top 10 Innovations 2016

    This year’s list of winners celebrates both large leaps and small (but important) steps in life science technology.

  2. Gut Microbes Linked to Neurodegenerative Disease
  3. Pubic Hair Grooming Linked to STI Risk
    The Nutshell Pubic Hair Grooming Linked to STI Risk

    Observational study suggests pubic hair grooming correlates with heightened risk of acquiring sexually transmitted infections, although causation remains unclear.

  4. Naive T Cells Find Homes in Lymphoid Tissue
Rockland